In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 529
Online now 1744 Record: 10351 (3/11/2012)
The largest and most active MSU Spartans board on the web
The place to ask questions to SpartanTailgate's recruiting experts
"The Duff" is dedicated to Michigan State football recruiting discussion
"The Bres" is dedicated to Michigan State basketball recruiting discussion
This is your pulpit to preach to the masses about everything from politics to religion
The place to buy, trade or sell Michigan State tickets
For fantasy football and other fantasy sports discussion
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Perhaps you need a lesson in reading comprehension. He didn't say anything about WMU being world beaters or being the poster child for a great program.
He stated why WMU has had a resurgence in the last 3 years, and won't be going away in the near future. Until 2010, WMU paid their coaches bottom of the CCHA salaries. Now, they pay top 8 in the country money. They've always had a few solid players, but the coaching wasn't there. Now, they have an administration who was woken by Miami's title run in 2009, and finally pumped $$$ into the program.
You would be kidding yourself if you didn't consider them a sleeping giant.
"Western Michigan was on his mind. The Wolverines had swept the Broncos with ease in the quarterfinals in Ann Arbor the week before. Berenson said it was a “shame” that WMU’s program wasn’t better. He talked about what a great hockey town Kalamazoo was and how the fans deserved better. He said there was absolutely no reason why the school shouldn’t have a great team, why Lawson Arena shouldn’t be sold out every weekend. And he meant what he said, as if he was genuinely frustrated by it."
This post was edited by DrVan Nostrand1 14 months ago
The question was why teams like WMU and Ferris are trending upward, while MSU is trending downward and I, as a hardcore CCHA fan who has visited every rink in the league except Alaska, gave a pretty valid and unbiased evaluation, so quit your whining. It comes down to three things: Coaching, recruiting and community support. This discussion is about what is happening in the here and now, not the last decade or two and the Comley era.
So stop aiming your angst at me and maybe direct it at your fellow Spartans who face some adversity and suddenly no longer care about your college hockey program, especially one with such a storied history. As someone wrote earlier, a serious sports fan in Michigan that doesn't care about college hockey is not a serious sports fan.
You sound like a real upstanding citizen that I'm sure Kalamazoo and the WMU community missed having around after your departure.
What are you,the Bullwrinkle of the Anastos era? All you do is complain. Are you a BW schtick?
no. You gotta admit it's pretty damn bad. I don't like being last in the CCHA. When you're last in the CCHA there tends to be not too many bright spots to look at or too many memories to be fond of. I'm not one of those people that likes to take failure and say well at least we squeaked by LSSU and had 5 conference wins instead of 4. I like to look at/discuss what needs to be done to fix it. The fact that it can only get better is one of the few bright spots right now and I was making light of that. Did you think the season went well and there's not much to complain about regarding the state of MSU hockey? I'm sorry though, moving forward I'll try to be happier about finishing dead last and being the laughing stock of the league
My comprehension is just fine, thank you....didn't know you and Bronco were a tag team.
Coming around here, beating your chest about 3 years of success, lacks perspective and maturity.
"and won't be going away in the near future"....is based on what? Your gut instinct? It's certainly not history. Your opinion is based on your hope and emotion. Trust me, if MSU can have a couple down years (and look at UM, btw), WMU can be back in the crapper with a couple recruiting misses.
There was no question asked....there was a statement about the relative resources of MSU vs. WMU and FSU.
I have no angst, but I am old enough to have seen college hockey since the early 1980's and I have played in almost every CCHA rink in Michigan. Point being, I am more patient to see how things turn out than speculating based on a 3 year window of results. I also did not get my panties in a bunch over UM's recent football woes.
I think anyone reading would interpret your posts as trumpeting the greatness of WMU on a MSU message board....maybe you should just slow down a bit on the historical implications of WMU's recent success and/or MSU's recent shortcomings (and that shot about coming over to check out the WMU-Miami game was bush league).
Patience...No one is happy about the situation, but arguing with emotion like our WMU friends does not make your points any more valid or compelling. By this time next year we will have a much better idea if Anastos can get the job done, even if the results are not there yet.
What do you expect? You come in here and talk smack about you national championship winning hockey team....wait...not true....your multi CCHA award winning....wait....not true either. So, why ARE you in here again? I just stated a fact: I went there for TWO years: they suck at most everything and the town is best known for a mediocre MAC school, an excellent liberal arts school in KCollege that hosts a TENNIS tournament once a year and well......not much else.
They USE to have a really cool air show and couldn't hang on to that either. You're like the other guy in this thread attacking me. Butt hurt because WMU is mediocre and Kalamazoo is just............BLAND. Don't shoot the messenger mon. Peace out Wastern cheerleader!
I indeed am aware that currently things are rough. Many of us had an idea that things were going to be a struggle this year, though. We just hoped that it somehow wouldn't be.
Of course, last year we made it to the NCAA tourney in his first year. While our goals are surely loftier than that, it was a good start. Last year's team had plenty of veteran talent while this year's team has nearly none. Was last year's solid results due entirely to seniors who overcame shitty coaching? I don't exactly believe so. Is this year due to shitty coaching? Is it mainly due to all of the youth and turnover? Nobody can say for certain but I have a feeling that this was one of those years we were just going to have to endure. Anastos even foreshadowed it all before the season even started. I remeber him saying that this team was going to have to scratch and claw in every game to get wins and clearly he wasn't kidding. I guessed that to be coach speak for "this team has major holes." Even his lack of experience didn't stop him from seeing the huge shortcomings the team currently has.
This post was edited by All Ages Shows 14 months ago
Stenglein indeed looks to be a great player. I am excited to see him here as I think he could have an immediate impact.
MacEachern was scoring a point per game until a concussion or something knocked him out of the lineup for several weeks. Ever since then, he has not been scoring nearly like he was. I am hoping he will get back on track eventually. He is obviously talented and NHL scouts saw something in him so I think he will come back around.
Joe Cox is having a very solid year in the USHL. It looks like he has been in a bit of a drought lately but he was leading Muskegon in scoring for much of the year, I believe.
They are the only players coming in right now since we lose so little. I think all 3 will be pretty key in giving this team an injection of offense.
He's literally the WMU version of Howler/Dix.
Tim Hiller for Heisman, Bill Cubit>Dantonio, WMU hockey being some type of Flying Frenchmen in waiting. It's all MAC level garbage that has no relevance to the board. MSUs future success has literally nothing to do with western. If Anastos gets this program to even 1/2 of what it was under mason you won't see broncos continued trolling.
"losing Caleb Benenoch is a blow that Dantonio will never recover from. Izzo has lost it as well. Hoke and Beilein own the state."
There have been many arenas built since Munn (both college and NHL) that don't have natural light filtering through to the rink. Natural light on the concourse is fine, as long as it doesn't get through to the playing surface.
I'e played in a couple rinks with natural lighting over my years and they are definitely distracting during the day time. Nice to look at, though.
The actual Munn rink is fine. It's the locker room and inner areas that need an upgrade. I've also been in NMU and Ferris' locker rooms and ours are not as good as Ferris' and on par with NMU. Also, this was as of somewhere between 7-10 years ago for both. I know ours hasn't improved since then.
that's the thing. I dont know if you could build a rink that has better sight lines than munn does. It's just really really really outdated underneath. The locker room is small and cramped compared to most teams. The workout room in munn is worthless. It just needs a tower like football with new locker rooms, workout facilities, film room/players lounge, will call etc. Just give the concourse a little face lift and we'd be in business. It is coming in the next few years though. The plan was to try and raise enough private donations to build a new arena, ultimately we fell short on that. I've heard the plan should be in place and construction underway in the next couple years. who knows though
I'll chime in on a couple topics...
Munn may have great sight lines, but player amenities are awful. The video room wouldn't pass for a studio apartment in Manhattan. Of the 24 teams in the new B1G/NCHC/WCHA leagues, I would rank MSU 10th or 11th at best. Of those 24 same teams, 18 have either built new arenas or have renovated player amenities in the last 20 years.
Small vs. Big Name Programs
Hockey is a sport that's 3rd or 4th in popularity on MSU's own campus compared to Minnesota, the NCHC, and WCHA, where I would say hockey is the most popular sport for 17 or 18 of those schools. If you're at North Dakota, you're BMOC at not only the Grand Forks, but half the state.
College hockey is limited to 18 scholarships for 26-man rosters and two full-time assistant coaches. The advantages a big name, big budget program has in football doesn't translate to hockey. Football has 85 scholarships for teams that take less than 60 players on the road. You can stock talent.
Division II, III and MAC programs like Michigan Tech, Lake Superior, Northern Michigan, Renssalaer, Minnesota-Duluth, and Bowling Green have all won national championships in the last 40 years, so I'm not sure why people are so perplexed how Miami could have a better team in conference right now than a B1G program. For most of the 80s, MSU's biggest rival was Bowling Green, a MAC school. For half the 80s, Lake Superior owned MSU in the Soo. For half the 90s, Lake Superior owned MSU everywhere-Soo, EL, the Joe. This is nothing new in college hockey. Small schools heavily invested can play on the same level and sometimes above B1G schools.
Passing final judgment on Anastos this season, a season where he had to replace 10 letterwinners in a sport where recruits commit one to two full seasons beforehand, is a knee-jerk reaction. The team overachieved last season, in my opinion. The team has underachieved this season. I had them at 8th with no hope of finishing above 7th in conference. I would have never thought 12th.
I saw the new arena at North Dakota in 2008. Wow.....Put a building like that at MSU, and it's the 1980's all over again for our program.
It is a bit of a pet peeve of mine that people discuss college hockey and use non-hockey conference terms like MAC, Division II, etc. It has nothing to do with college hockey, so those who bemoan a program like Miami, Quinnipiac, Western Michigan, or St. Cloud State (all top-10 right now in the Pairwise) being better than bigger name programs like Michigan State, Wisconsin, Ohio State, etc. do not understand either the history or current state of collegiate hockey. It is a sport that is different than the big sports of basketball and football, with the only fair comparison being college baseball. The size of the school, or the conference they compete in in other sports, has nothing to do with the investment they can make in college hockey.
Bronco13 said it well...it comes down to coaching, recruiting, and community support. Facilities just need to be comparable to peer institutions. There is no way to look at this and not see how State went in the wrong direction in recent years. The good news in college hockey is that the path (back) to relevance is not nearly as steep as a basketball or football.....
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." --Gandhi
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports